Would you buy an ex council flat

[FTBldn]

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/147214010

Ftb in London, and found this flat which from brief pictures looks to be well presented for the price and so central (0.2m from Kennington station). I’ve not viewed it or anything but pretty sure I’ve walked past it before and area feels very safe

Would it be trickier to sell though?
or better to go for a ‘nicer’ flat but further out eg zone 3

budget of 380k, ideally looking for a 2bed flat

Well, I’ve bought an ex-council house in the past so I would say yes, but I would agree that there were barriers to selling them and possibly the value is suppressed compared to homes of similar size, but there are always others who are prepared to go for it as often they represent good value in terms of the space you get for the price.

That one has a tenant in situ so if you were planning to live in it, it’s not going to be a suitable purchase.

I personally wouldn’t consider an ex-council property if it is a flat, often the council will pass on costs for improvements to leaseholders. I rented a flat very close by to the one you’ve posted which was an ex-council flat and my landlord ended up with a £30k bill for window replacement works.

I own, and am living in an ex council house. But I wouldn’t buy a flat. I heard a report a while ago that it can be a problem if the council still own the building. One person was saying that the council decided to replace all the windows. Free of charge to council tenants but they charged the owners a fortune, like £20k or something crazy. That was years ago now so I would suspect the same could be true of replacing the cladding if needed.

Ex council houses can be great value. Be very wary of a flat if the council still own the freehold, or any flats left in yhe block. They can impose building works and charge whatever they like without looking at who would do it foe vest value.

Have I read it right that it’s £5300 service charge a year?? Does say Hot water and heating included but that still seems incredibly excessive…

I bought an ex-council flat (was 20 years ago and not in London) and it was great.

Solidly built so couldn't hear neighbours and also really good size rooms. A bit ugly on the outside though! I had friends living in modern flat in a factory conversion which was very trendy but you could hear the neighbours sneeze!

I was there 4 years and during that time the windows were replaced, new intercom/door security was installed and also some decorative/ security fencing put round the building - all at no extra cost to me (I obviously paid ground rent and a monthly service charge though). I guess I might have been lucky though and reckon things may be different now.

Why is it cash buyers only? Is there a reason people can't get a mortgage for it?

I did and have no regrets because it meant i could live in a handy and desirable bit of London. Just bear these things in mind: don’t buy in a block with a lift - the costs when it needs a new one can be huge. Most building societies won’t give you a mortgage above something like the 5th/6th floor so look for things which are low-level. Check the cladding situation, even on low-rise, look at when major works on the roof and windows were last done, and look
at the service charge - that one looks bonkers.

My kids have been trying to buy similar this year. They only needed a 25% mortgage but got turned down repeatedly because of saleability.

I think the issues are unregulated maintenance charges (LA using private owners to subsidise repairs), number of storeys, cladding certificates where none were required and a snobbishness about areas/number of council tenants.

A real shame because they missed out on some beautiful flats.

You won't be able to buy it if you need a mortgage. It is being sold with tenants in situ.

I wouldn’t touch it.
The service charge would put me off.
The fact that the service charge includes the heating is a problem. I can’t remember the exact details but the way that works means you are being charged at a business rate and you can’t switch or in some cases control it. There was quite a lot of publicity about that a couple of years ago IIRC.
It isn’t mortgageable - why?
there is a tenant, so it’s not suitable if you want to live there.
If the Council are the leaseholder they can decide on improvements and charge private owners a higher proportion of the costs, one of my friends had this with replacement windows.

It's the construction method, you can't get mortgages on them these days. You used to be able to.

@FTBldn this is not a good prospective purchase for you.
A there's a tenant already there who might get awkward about moving out
B. You won't get a mortgage

Nothing wrong with ex council properties at all, there's a risk you might have neighbours that are difficult to live close to in some way but not necessarily. However I would always urge that you choose a traditionally constructed building that you'll probably be able to get a mortgage on

The service charges are that high because of the lifts, they cost a lot to run and maintain/repair

Thank you all, really helpful comments

Probably because it’s being sold with a tenant in situ.

As far as I’m aware, mortgages require properties to be sold with vacant possession (empty)

@FTBldn if you need a mortgage or want to buy somewhere you hope could be an investment as well as a home, you would be better buying a property in zone 3 that isn’t ex council with a tenant in situ. That is the reason this flat appears to be so cheap (for London).

Ex council houses, certainly, however I believe there may be issues with flats in that you may have to contribute (a lot) to shared maintenance.

Don't.

As a private owner you would end up with large bills if the council needs to do work on the building.

I would also never buy in a high rise building.

One more thing about potential costs just to give you an idea. I've owned my flat for 23 years. In that time there's been one occurrence of 'major works', which was largely to fix the roof. I was billed about £12k for that and given at least 3 years notice and a further 3 years to pay it off.

Of course any leasehold flat, ex council or no, may mean shared costs come up from time to time, which will need to be negotiated between you, other leaseholders and the freeholder. When the latter is the council, they just say: this work's being done, here's the bill, pretty much.

If you can buy a flat with a share of the freehold that's always going to be preferable, as you have more control. But in London it's often just not possible. Some people will say 'I'd never buy a leasehold flat', but if you live in London it's a fact of life unless you're loaded.

I wouldn’t be buy a leasehold flat because I’d be worried to death about getting stuck on for the cost of replacing the roof/windows/lift/external
insulation, etc.

On Mumsnet you will always get very alarmist posts about how they would never ever buy a leasehold flat, but in specific markets (especially London) it is a compromise many make. For example, house prices in the south east are not significantly lower but can add £1000s in commuting costs making it unaffordable to buy outside of London (I have signed letters to mortgage lenders saying we would not request return to office as they would not lend otherwise.) The vast majority of flats are leasehold, the vast majority of affordable housing stock in cities are flats.

In terms of major works bills it’s your appetite for risk, certain things will increase that risk (cladding, lifts) and some things will decrease it (specific leaseholders/borough councils, under 5 stories, etc). The benefits are far more space and better layouts, and often fewer flats adjoining the sides (noise). The key benefit is that those flats are far more affordable than comparable period conversions or purpose built private blocks, often even once including the possibility of major works bills.

The tenant I expect. You won’t get a residential mortgage for a flat with a sitting tenant. Not sure about blt mortgages.

I lived in an ex-council flat in London for 12 years, and I simply don't recognise the issues some people (who have probably no experience of actually owning ex-council) are talking about above. My service charges were not high at all (too long ago to remember what it was) and actually the council is very highly regulated about what it can charge for major works, so you are actually far safer from unreasonable demands for money than you are with unregulated private management companies. They have to get a certain number of bids, prove that they are reputable and not brown paper envelope deals, as an owner you have the right to raise objections if you think the costs are unreasonable.

That said, mine was a relatively small brick-built block, with no lift and I understand lift maintenance is one of the biggest costs that can come and hit you in a block of flats. Admittedly you have no control of what is done when with council blocks - so you can't argue that the roof, double-glazing or whatever is done sooner rather than later, but you do get a lot of warning of any upcoming works because the processes are so convoluted around having to have notice of intent, notice they are going out for bids - it goes on quite a long time (years!) before the work is done and then you are billed afterwards.

I also found that having the council as the freeholder was brilliant for availability and accessibility. As a leaseholder I had access to the same helplines etc as the council tenants, and the council have maintenance teams that can fix issues quickly without having to go around finding private contractors and all that complexity. When the flat above me had a leak that came into my kitchen, we both contacted the council who just sent their maintenance guys round within hours and sorted.

Council flats are always less popular, which means you get less when you sell than you would for a private flat of a similar size/location. But you will also have bought it at a lower price in the first place, so it's not really the right comparison to make. As above, you just need to think of them as "good value" for the buyer.

No. Absolutely not a flat, no.

If the council owns the freehold it's a dangerous position.

Those that own, seem to foot the bill for general repairs and window replacements for the whole block.

It's repeatedly one of those wild cards that can look good on paper but fraught with horrors.

Many have to take the council to court to get this sorted out. I've followed some real horror stories.

I would however buy a freehold ex council house in a blink. They were built well
In their day and are generally well designed.

Our first flat was an ex council flat in a small block. All but one were privately owned. We did have to pay for some maintenance but it wasn't an extortionate amount. It was a decent size and a great location